ObiQuiet Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Just a thought experiment... Assertion: Peer pressure is the strongest social motivator we have Assumption: Peer pressure has an effect on individual behavior even in an on-line game environment, despite the anonymity and immunity of being behind a keyboard. Concept: Allow people to "shun" other players with a mechanism similar to a "like" Scenario: 1. BadBob does something in-game that OffendedOllie doesn't like (swears, rams, etc) 2. OffendedOllie can choose to "shun" BadBob for a few minutes, the rest of the battle, the day, or forever. As part of this OffendedOllie can choose not to see comments from BadBob, and maybe never be paired with him in a battle room. 3. BadBob gets notifications that he's been "shunned". These are limited to these: "OffendeOllie has shunned you" (if one) OR "Several people have shunned you" (if several within a few minutes) 4. To avoid encouraging bad behaviour ("Oh yea, I'll show 'em how bad I can be!!") the "Several people have shunned you" message repeats in battle every few minutes IFF other people keep shunning BadBob. There has to be no incentive to keep being bad -- this mechanism will only work if the game can indicate the "mood" of other players towards BadBob, and must blur the cause-and-effect. Theory: If BadBob just gets periodic "people don't like you" messages with no direct connection to his provoking behaviour, he'll get bored of trying to provoke. And, those who are offended benefit from being able to tell the game they want to ignore BadBob. I'm sure someone has done a PhD thesis on the workings on-line negative reinforcement. Maybe it's even been tried in a game before. Thoughts? (Remember, I didn't claim it was a good idea.) (If someone is using the name "BadBob" - just shun me). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 I think shuns are a bit much. I would rather see the same as other MMO's where you can simply mute and block people if they really get on your nerves. Some people will always troll, always try to provoke stuff, and negative reinforcement won't do anything to them. Welcome to online gaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Mutes and blocks coming 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharden Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Mutes and blocks coming You, sir, almost make me cry for joy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diceman Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Just a thought experiment... Assertion: Peer pressure is the strongest social motivator we have Assumption: Peer pressure has an effect on individual behavior even in an on-line game environment, despite the anonymity and immunity of being behind a keyboard. Concept: Allow people to "shun" other players with a mechanism similar to a "like" Scenario: 1. BadBob does something in-game that OffendedOllie doesn't like (swears, rams, etc) 2. OffendedOllie can choose to "shun" BadBob for a few minutes, the rest of the battle, the day, or forever. As part of this OffendedOllie can choose not to see comments from BadBob, and maybe never be paired with him in a battle room. 3. BadBob gets notifications that he's been "shunned". These are limited to these: "OffendeOllie has shunned you" (if one) OR "Several people have shunned you" (if several within a few minutes) 4. To avoid encouraging bad behaviour ("Oh yea, I'll show 'em how bad I can be!!") the "Several people have shunned you" message repeats in battle every few minutes IFF other people keep shunning BadBob. There has to be no incentive to keep being bad -- this mechanism will only work if the game can indicate the "mood" of other players towards BadBob, and must blur the cause-and-effect. Theory: If BadBob just gets periodic "people don't like you" messages with no direct connection to his provoking behaviour, he'll get bored of trying to provoke. And, those who are offended benefit from being able to tell the game they want to ignore BadBob. I'm sure someone has done a PhD thesis on the workings on-line negative reinforcement. Maybe it's even been tried in a game before. Thoughts? (Remember, I didn't claim it was a good idea.) (If someone is using the name "BadBob" - just shun me). This just sounds like another bullying tactic. It will be abused. We have the tribunal now to handle grievances where each party is allowed to voice it's argument. If you got a problem take it too the proper forum to be handled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirThawkz Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Not sure if peer pressure does always work. I was in a battle earlier where players were shooting their own team and 'farming' in order to rank up their ships. Obvoiusly this isn't really in the apirit of the game and they offending players were told as much repeatedly. Didn't seem to bother them. Any chance something can be introduced so that damage done to team mates doesn't contribute to damage points for ship ranking purposes? I know the ranking system is only temporary but it would nip those shortcuts in the bud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouse of war Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Mute will be great -- always useful to turn off foul mouthed players and always makes me smile knowing that they are wasting their breath and gradually getting more and more marginalised Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiQuiet Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 Mutes and blocks coming Well, naturally. That will be welcomed. To be clear, I was exploring an idea beyond those standard mechanisms -- not making a feature request. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernWolves Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 I was in a battle earlier where players were shooting their own team Report that behavior, with screenshots, with names 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirThawkz Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Report that behavior, with screenshots, with names I don't have screenshot's of the individual but if I see it again in future I'll make sure I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanielCoffey Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 An issue with the idea of not being paired with a shunned individual in a battle is that if BadBob has enough people shunning him, what happens when he enters the lobby? Can the battle even go ahead while he is present? Could he in theory hold the lobby to ransom by his presence? If someone on each team has him in a shunned list, could he be left behind in the lobby when the battle starts along with "I am sorry but no one present in the staging area wanted to sail with you" message? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admaa Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I'm rather new to writing in this community (I'm a bit of a lurker) but I'll add my 2 cents from playing 70+ hours.A system like this would be abused too easily in my experience in gaming, my trust in people involved with online-gaming and competitve hot-headedness in turn will always be pessimistic at best unfortunately. A system that relies on crowd-based judgement and shunning would and will be subject to more problems than it would solve.For instance;> Person A accedentally crashes into person B (for any reason, accedents happen),> Person A apologises to person B,> Person B gets loud in chat stating how person A is a troll because he crashed into him,> Person C D E F on same team gets annoyed that A crashed into B,> Person B says in all chat to "shun" Person A, causing person A to get X ammount of shuns for no reason.There's so many instances where I have made stupid mistakes, apologised rather openly to another player for accedentally crashing ito them, and they got completely out of control. They could easily cause greif for a player that didn't mean to do the action in the first place.A mute and a block/blacklist suffice well enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chustler Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I remember I got good at a fighting game back in the day on the Xbox 360. They had a system for reporting abuse and cheating etc. I happened to be a natural at this game, and all of a sudden I started to rack up an inordinate number of complaints against me for abuse and cheating even though I never cheat on any game an I am always pleasant and respectful to my opponents. Any game that includes competitive combat and or peoples egos will lead to people raging when they lose. A system like you recommend here will be abused.... A lot. Unfortunate, but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiQuiet Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 Thank you guys for entertaining my thought-experiment and taking the time to respond & discuss. The points about abuse are well-taken. In the model I had in mind, there would be no in-game harm to someone who was shunned but knew in their heart that they had committed no foul. No reporting to admins, just the occasional generic message that "some people are ignoring you". On thinking it through, the idea is not much more than a "mute with notification" where the notification to the muted player is a disembodied and time-shifted announcement of the community's general attitude toward them. DanielCoffey's point about the practical implications in a lobby environment are something I didn't think about. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts